In article ,
SPAM)vasys" "no(SPAM wrote:
Mark & Juanita wrote:


It's probably a bit pre-mature to assume that race was the motivating
factor here. How was the guy dressed? If he was dressed down, is it
possible this was a trigger of suspicion? If a similarly dressed-down
white person had attempted the same thing would the same paranoia have
reigned at Walmart?



I have to agree. I don't think the article gives the entire story.

As a small business owner, for an order of this size, I would have
required that everything related to the purchase was prearranged and
approved, including who the authorized person would be that would be
picking up the order. It looks like many previous orders were
transacted and in this instance the HR manager was a new face. I
suspect this had a major impact on what transpired.

That _possibly_ justifies calling the corporate offices to confirm.

There is *NO* excuse for what happened -after- the corporate offices
were called, and the check's validity and the bearer's identity were
confirmed by corporate.

When the store refused to either produce the ordered gift cards _or_
to return the check, _I_ would have been on the phone to the police,
and swearing out a complaint for 'grand theft' against the store manager.

As it is, I hope they nail that manager for 'making a false police report',
since said manager *knew* the check was valid/good, having confirmed that
with GAF's accounting department by phone. I suspect that his actions
meet the legal qualifications for 'actual malice', and he is in *deep*
doo-doo, legally. HD, _corporately_, *may* be off the hook for precisely
that reason -- that it was the manager's malice, not corporate policy that
provoked the incident.